- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 13:40:53 -0700
- To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 22:12:34 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: ... > HTML has the feature of two serializations: a classic serialization that > is error-tolerant, and an XML-based serialization that has draconian > error handling. These have different costs and benefits, ultimately it > is a benefit to HTML authors that they have a choice. I think SVG > deserves to have this feature as well, there's no reason it should fall > short of HTML in this regard. Supporting SVG inline in text/html seems > like a good opportunity to add this feature to SVG. Perhaps. The cans of worms are different though. HTML elements are basically content - in principle, the text tree is reasonably useful (unless you have images). SVG is about images - having parts of an image not render can drastically alter the semantics ofthe image. SVG has a mechanism for handling broken subtrees, which involves showing that it is broken. Somewhere there might be a sweet spot that we can find with the SVG group. But it's not ust a case of "they should do as we do". (And I agree that the luxury of having the choice of a strict syntax is nice, and would hate to see that baby tossed out with any bathwater we may find in the requirement to be intolerant). cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Sunday, 16 March 2008 20:41:35 UTC